H 


yp 


^rcr<tAC\sm 


7 


ToU-n    McD.  Leavi-t-t 


-,v  ,^:  ' ■■"■  y-  f^'^  <  :C *'f^'^^.:^'tv-' 


■U'  . i-''^'  ,--'' 


■.'-v  \-^- 


m 


vm 


//.   ?'.'32> 


4.:^^ 


bj;* 


^i  ttit  ®I?foIngtfa/  ^ 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


'^.> 


'iS^/.. 


^v^ 


Section . 


Division. !* 

,BS55 

Co  ipY  \ 


Vol    XIII 


No.  I. 


CI^c   parisi).   * 


PUBLISHED  MONTHLY  BY 


%.  Sohn'Q  (3uilb. 


The  Reverend  George  F.  Breed,  Rector. 


©ctober,  1899. 


_^ 


THE  PARISH 


OCTOBER,   1899. 

1.  Bigbtecntb  SunDag  after  ^rinitg. 

2.  S.  John's  Guild,  8  P.M. 

6.  Fr.     Evening  Prayer,  5  r.M. 

8.  minetcentb  ^unOag  atter  Q:rinitB. 

10.  Tu.     Missionary  Chapter,  2  p.m. 
13.  Fr.     Evening  Prayer,  5  p.m. 

15.  Zvocntictb  SunOag  after  a:rinits. 

17.  Tu.     Missionary  Chapter,  2  p.m. 

18.  We.     S.  Luke,  Evangelist,  Holy  Communion, 

7:30  A.M. 
20.   Fr.     Evening  Prayer,  5  p.m. 

22.  irwentB=firgt  SuiiDag  after  n:rinitB- 

24.  Tu.     Missionary  Chapter,  2  p.m. 

28.  Sa.     B,   S.  Simon  anO  JllOe.     Holy  Com. 

munion,  7'30  a.m. 

29.  XTwents-seconD  SunOay  after  ^rinitg. 

31.  Tu.     Missionary  Chapter,  2  p.m. 


PARISH  NOTES. 
The  Parish  now  begins  its  tliirtcenth  year 
of  continuous   life  without  adverlisements  or 
a  subscription  price. 


The  first  meeting  of  S.  John's  Guild  was 
held  Monday  evening,  Oct.  2nd.  The  election 
of  officers  was  omitted.  Therefore  the  officers 
of  last  year  will  continue  in  their  places  for 
another  year.  Mrs.  M,  R.  Kintzing,  was 
appointed  Head  of  the  Altai-  Chapter.  Mr. 
Frank  Wright,  Head  of  the  Choir  Chapter,  and 
W.  A.  Atkinson,  Head  of  the  Sunday  School 
Chapter.  The  Missionary  Chapter  is  con- 
tinued and  the  Head  of  the  Chapter  will  be 
appointed  at  the  next  Guild  Meeting. 


Last  year  the  Rector  received  a  gift  of  five 
hundred  dollars  to  be  used  as  he  deemed  best 
for  the  interests  of  the  parish.  He  tliought 
then  that  a  new  Organ  was  a  most  urgent  need 
and  therefore  created  an  organ  fund  which  is 
now  held  by  the  Treasurer  of  the  parish  for 
this  purpose.  After  a  year  of  trial  there  seems 
little  hope  of  getting  a  new  organ  and  there- 
fore the  Rector  now  withdraws  this  five 
hundred  dollars  from  said  fund  and  will  place 
it  conditionally   in   the  Mortgage  Debt  fund. 


Recently  the  Rector  received  from  a  friend  not 
in  the  parish  five  hundred  dollars  that  he  will 
add  to  the  amount  already  in  hand,  making 
one  thousand  dollars  which  he  will  place  in 
the  hands  of  the  Treasurer  of  the  parish  to  be 
applied  to  the  Mortgage  Debt  whenever  a  like 
amount  shall  be  raised  by  the  parish  for  this 
purpose.  With  this  offer  before  us,  it  ought 
not  to  be  hard  to  reduce  our  debt  this  year  two 
thousand'dollars. 


Ask  some  friend  to  come  with  you  to 
Church.  Perhaps  it  you  try  you  may  induce 
some  one  to  rent  a  pew.  If  you  try,  certainly 
you  can  get  one  scholar  for  our  Sunday 
School. 


Teachers  are  needed  in  the  Sunday  School. 
Who  will  come  to  help  us  in  this  good  work  ? 


Two  dollars  will  furnish  flowers  for  the 
Altar  for  one  Sunday.  How  can  you  better 
commemorate  the  death  of  some  loved  one 
than  by  thus  adorning  God's  Altar  ?  Send 
your  offering  to  the  head  of  the  Altar  Chapter 
or  to  the  Rector. 


Our  Monthly  Music  List  has  made  its 
welcome  appearance  again.  It  is  now  printed 
by  Mr.  Creveling  who  is  a  faithful  member  of 
our  Choir.  Contributions  to  pay  for  this 
greatly  appreciated  publication  will  be  thank- 
fully received  by  the  Rector. 


We  are  very  sorry  to  loose  from  our  parish 
two  valuable  and  successful  workers  in  our 
Guild.  Mrs.  Clark,  who  has  been  at  the  head 
of  The  Missionary  Chapter,  and  Mrs.  Wilcox, 
its  Secretary,  have  both  moved  to  New  York. 
We  shall  miss  them,  and  while  we  do  not 
expect  to  ever  fill  their  places  yet  we  mean  to 
keep  up  their  good  work  as  we  know  they 
would  have  us  do.  More  than  a  passing 
word  of  commendation  and  of  regret  because 
of  our  loss  is  due  to  Mrs.  Clark,  who  for  ten 
years  past  has  so  successfully  planned  and 
guided  the  work  of  the  Missionary  Chapter  of 
our   Guild.     She  possessed  very    remarkable 


I 


THE   PARISH. 


ability  to  attract  and  hold  together  a  strong 
band  of  workers,  in  the  vineyard  of  the  Lord, 
and  she  spared  not  herself  to  accomplish  all  in 
her  power  for  her  Church  which  she  loved  so 
much.  In  her  new  home  and  work,  Mrs. 
Clark  caries  with  her,  the  best  wishes  of  the 
Missionary  Chapter  and  of  all  who  knew  her 
in  S.  John's  Parish. 


We  are  glad  to  publish  in  this  issue  of  The 
Parish  a  valuable  paper  read  before  the 
B.'ooklyn  Clencal  League,  Oct.  2nd,  by  John 
McDowell ^O-eavitt,  D.D.,  L.L.D.,  who  is  an 
esteemed  member  of  S.  John's  Church. 


HYPERCRITICISM. 

A  REVIEW  OF  THE  STUDY  OF  HOLY  SCRIPTURE. 


It  is  difficult  to  distinguish  the  man  from  his 
system.  Origen  was  a  saint  and  a  genius,  yet 
he  often  allegorized  scripture  into  nonsense. 
Most  eloquent  of  Latin  Fathers,  the  pious  and 
learned  TertuUian,  was  a  cynical  ascetic  who 
ended  in  Montanism.  Ambrose  of  Milan,  the 
wise  Bishop,  the  ecclesiastical  statesman,  the 
magnificent  poet  and  preacher,  said  and  did, 
what  our  veneration  wishes  otherwise.  Prince 
of  theologians,  peerless  in  argument,  brilliant 
in  style,  Augustine  glorified  relics,  and  en- 
couraged invocations  of  saints.  The  im- 
mortal author  of  the  Vulgate,  Jerome,  was 
discourteous  and  violent.  Basil,  the  Greg- 
cries,  Chrysostom,  equals  of  Cicero  in 
splendor  of  oratory,  and  glowing  with  exalted 
piety,  were  superstitious  as  medioeval  monks. 
Under  the  spell  of  that  nightmare  of  philos- 
ophy. Gnosticism,  we  yet  deem  Marcion  a 
Christian.  No  possible  human  errancy  sur- 
prises those  familiar  with  ecclesiastical  history. 
During  the  Decian  persecutions,  when  fire 
tested  faith,  the  Clementines  were  read  like 
Pilgrim's  Progress,  and  after  two  centuries  in 
Greek  were  translated  by  Rufinus  into  Latin, 
yet   the    story    of    the    Fall    they   ridicule    as 


"senseless,"  scorn  Moses,  insult  the  Baptist, 
denounce  Paul,  and  make  Peter  say,  "  in  the 
Scripture  are  some  true  sayings,  and  some 
spurious."  As  we  estimate  the  past,  so  must 
we  measure  Dr.  Briggs,  with  charity  as  well 
as  justice.  We  bring  to  the  Bar,  not  the  man, 
but  his  book. — "The  Study  of  Holy 
Scripture." 

Hypercriticism  we  distinguish  from  Higher 
Criticism.  The  aims  and  principles  of  the  latter 
we  approve.  It,  and  its  antithesis.  Textual 
Criticism,  have  their  place,  and  it  is  only 
against  an  extreme  that  we  argue.  We  can 
advance  what  we  wish  to  develop  in  a  single 
proposition. — Hypercriticism  is  a  proba- 
bility, while  Christianity  is  a  Certitude. 

All  literary  research  into  a  far  past  is  under  a 
haze.  Each  archaeologist  feels  his  way  in  mist. 
Have  we  one  Homer?  Is  the  Iliad  a  unit? 
Who  wrote  the  Odeyssey  ?  Did  many  minds 
create  the  immortal  poems  ?  Thirty  centuries 
have  not  answered  these  questions.  Battle  is 
now  fighting  over  the  tomb  of  Shakespeare, 
and  his  glory  given  to  Bacon.  A  hundred 
years  have  not  settled  the  authorship  of  Junius. 
It  seemed  proved  that  only  three  of  the  fifteen 
Ignatian  Epistles  were  genuine.  After  a  life- 
devotion  to  the  martyr  of  the  Colosseum,  great 
Lightfoot,  late  Bishop  of  Durham,  extends  the 
number  to  seven.  Another  generation  may 
change  his  estimate.  Josephus  ascribes  the 
Septuagint  to  the  seventy  at  Pharos  under  the 
patronage  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.  For 
nearly  two  thousand  years  this  statement  was 
accepted  as  historic  fact.  The  venerable  ver- 
dict has  been  reversed  by  a  modern  tribunal. 
Germany  and  Dr.  Briggs  decide  that  the 
illustrious  work  is  of  later  origin,  and  not  a 
translation,  but  a  targum.  Who  added  the 
Apocrypha?  Not  even  Hypercritism  can  an- 
swer. As  in  Assyriaso  in  Egypt,  Biblical  manu- 
scripts multiplied  differences  until  they  became 
innumerable  and  inexplicable.  Especially, 
puzzling  and  amazing  in  the  Septuagint  its 
wide  departures  from  the  Hebrew.  Sometimes 
there  is  not  the  remotest  resemblance  to  the 


THE  PARISH 


original.  Hypercriticism  in  determining  the 
authorship  of  Genesis  has  drawn  immense 
inferences  from  the  names  of  the  Deity.  In 
the  Septuagint  they  appear  without  plan,  or 
reference  to  ihe  original.  More  than  once  in 
the  narratives  of  the  creation  and  fall  where 
the  Hebrew  has— n^-i!?{<  nin^— the  Septuagint 
gives  only  S  Qeoi.  In  the  specification  for  the 
ark  this  is  reversed.  The  Septuagint  has 
/tvpioi  u  Beoi  where  we  have  but  nin''  in  the 
Hebrew. 

Philo  !  What  differences  about  this  illus- 
trious Alexandrian  Jew  !  To  him  is  attributed 
a  writing  of  the  first  century.  Then  it  is 
shown  to  be  of  the  third.  Again  it  is  proved 
Philo  was  not  the  author.  Nor  yet  are  critics 
satisfied.  Massebeau  and  Sandys  maintain 
genuineness.  Dr.  Briggs  dissents.  The  bat- 
tle will  be  waged  in  the  next  century. 

Surely  we  should  be  able  to  determine  the 
period  and  circumstances  and  authorship  of 
that  most  venerable  of  Christian  Symbols — the 
Apostles'  Creed  !  Dr.  Briggs  believes  that 
Schaff  dissipated  the  clouds  of  ages.  But 
about  four  years  since  the  celebrated  Harnak 
issued  another  explanation.  Thus  at  the  close 
of  our  nineteenth  century  the  glorious  old 
Creed  is  still  kept  oscillating  in  its  critical 
suspension. 

How  touching  and  beautiful  the  tradition 
ascribing  the  Te  Deum  to  Ambrose  of  Milan! 
For  ages  the  Church  believed  that  the  sublime 
hymn  was  chanted  first  at  the  baptism  of 
Augustine,  Archbishop  Usher  finds  two 
manuscripts  assigning  the  magnificent  com- 
position to  Nicetus,  in  A.  D.  535,  Bishop  of 
Treves, 

We  have  ourselves  witnessed  a  revolution 
in  the  pronunciation  of  the  classic  languages. 
Germany  has  supplanted  England.  In  my 
academic  days  kikero  was  a  blunder  of  vul- 
gar ignorance  ridiculed  in  a  boy's  address 
which  was  spouted  daily  in  the  schools  of  our 
land.  Now  it  is  accepted  in  our  colleges  and 
universities.     Greek  and  Latin  are  afloat.    No 


scholar  can  affirm  that  his  reading  of  Homer, 
or  Herodotus,  or  Plato,  or  ^schylus,  or  De- 
mosthenes, or  Cicero,  or  Horace,  or  Virgil,  or 
Livy,  or  Tacitus,  would  not  have  amused  and 
confused  those  classic  poets,  historians, 
orators  and  philosophers. 

What  shall  we  say  of  Hebrew  ?  Uncertain- 
ties multiply  !  Only  within  a  few  years  have 
our  theological  seminaries  grated  on  our  ears 
the  harsh,  uncouth,  and  irreverent  Jaweh. 
Jaw!  or  Yaw!  What  vulgar  syllables  in 
sound  and  suggestion  !  Can  they  mingle  in 
the  name  of  the  Majesty  of  the  Universe  ? 
Characteristically,  Hebrew  has  its  accent  on 
the  ultimate,  as  Aramaic  on  the  penult,  and 
Arabic  on  the  ante-penult.  This  rule  gives 
]e-ho-va/i  instead  of  Jaweh.  Polish  and  Ger- 
man Jews  accent  the  penult.  Some  hold  that 
in  reading  we  should  not  accent  the  accented 
syllable.  Saalchiitz  rejected  the  Massoretic 
vocalization  and  substituted  the  Aramaic. 
Amid  this  critical  confusion  we  might  spare 
our  ears  and  compromise  on  Jehcvah — that 
most  sublime  name  of  our  Creator. 

Dr.  Briggs  would  discard  the  Massoretic 
signs,  and  use  the  pointless  text.  With  a 
stroke  of  its  confident  pen,  young  America 
sweeps  away  the  traditional  aids  of  Rabbini- 
cal learning.  Left  to  its  sure  self  it  will  "  fix  " 
the  Hebrew  !  Yet  with  this  certainty  of  con- 
clusion, these  same  critics  are  not  agreed 
about  the  pronunciation  of  the  name  of  their 
God. 

Consider  the  exposure  of  our  Hebrew  Bible 
to  corruption  !  Before  the  captivity  the  rev- 
erential care  of  Scribes  kept  the  text  compara- 
tively pure.  Dispersions  brought  dark  streams 
of  various  errors  like  a  deluge  over  Holy 
Scripture.  In  Babylon  the  very  script  was 
revolutionized.  The  Hebrew  Script  was  sup- 
planted by  the  Aramaic  Script.  What  a  flood 
of  changes  this  produced  !  Popular  for  its 
promises  and  prophecies  of  national  restora- 
tion, Isaiah  would  be  peculiarly  exposed. 
And  even  in  more  peril  the  Psalter  !  The 
worship  of  Israel,  its   translations  would  mul- 


THE  PARISH 


5 


tiply.  As  the  Jew  passed  from  Hebrew  to 
Aramaic  in  script  and  speech,  while  copies  in- 
creased errors  would  grow.  Writing  in  Baby- 
lon, Daniel  composes  chapters  in  Aramaic. 
Ezekiel  is  colored  by  his  Assyrian  environ- 
hient.  We  have  in  Eygpt  the  inexplicable 
addition  ot  the  Apocrypha  in  the  Septuagint. 
Each  book,  each  chapter,  almost  each  verse, 
marks  the  influence  of  exile  on  the  banks  of 
the  Nile.  Scripture  was  scarcely  less  exposed 
in  Palestine.  During  the  Maccabean  persecu- 
tions the  Jewish  manuscripts  were  largely 
destroyed,  and  the  corrupted  Assyrian  and 
Egyptian  parchment-rolls  forced  into  the 
synagogues.  What  critic  can  prove  that  the 
Chaldeeisms  of  Isaiah  and  the  Psalter  were 
riot  introduced^  by  copyists  and  translators  ? 
We  are  in  a  land  of  mists  where  certainty  is 
unattainable.  In  such  darkness  Colenso, 
Briggs  and  Ingersoll  have  been  working,  and 
Hypercriticism  now  ventures  to  assert  that 
there  is  no  ability  in  Gcd  Himself  to  prevent 
the  errors  of  man. 

Difficulties  apply  to  the  whole  Bible.  Often 
they  are  insuperable.  Manuscripts  in  Hebrew 
and  Greek,  and  cognate  languages  have  to  be 
searched.  For  this  work  not  ten  living  scholars 
have  the  aptitude  and  ability.  In  America 
perhaps,  not  one.  Rabbins  are  to  be  stud- 
ied. The  Talmud  itself  is  a  life-labor. 
Targums  and  Translations  are  to  be  weigh- 
ed. Quotations  from  Fathers  open  a  vast 
field.  Nor  can  we  overlook  evidence  from 
history  and  archaeology.  How  intermi- 
nable the  task !  How  doubtful  the  labor  ! 
Often  how  unsatisfactory  the  result  !  In  the 
Commission  which  prepared  oift"  Revised  Vei- 
sion  were  two  parties  irreconcilably  antagonis- 
tic. Differences  were  fundamental,  and  cloud 
the  work  with  doubt.  The  disagreement  was  on 
the  very  principles  which  were  to  decide  the 
text.  One  set  held  that  the  combined  author- 
ity ot  the  Codex  Vaticanus  and  the  Codex 
Sinaitictis  should  always  together  fix  the 
reading,  while  the  other  maintained  that  not 
only  these  two,  but  all  other  authorities  should 


be  consulted.  So  that  this  division  still  leaves 
our  English  Bible  in  suspense. 

We  mention  these  facts  not  to  oppose  either 
General  Criticism,  or  Textual  Criticism,  or 
Higher  Criticism.  Each  has  its  wide  field  and 
noble  function.  Our  object  is  to  show  that  the 
man  of  true  science  is  required  to  feel  his  way 
with  conservative  modesty  in  regions  of  inevi- 
table probability.  The  scholar  transcending 
his  limitations  we  call  the  Hypercritic.  On  a 
lofty  throne  he  sits  who  decides  between  truth 
and  falsehood.  Presumption  cannot  hold  with 
even  hand  the  balance  of  eternal  justice. 
When  the  Bible  is  involved  arise  questions  of 
salvation  for  races  and  generations. 

Having  made  these  remarks,  we  approach 
with  pain  the  critical  infirmities  of  Dr.  Briggs. 

I.  Our  author  exalts  himself. 

Not  seldom  he  speaks  as  if  his  mere  schol- 
arly judgment  must  be  conclusive.  I  have 
not  counted  the  number  of  his  quoted  author- 
ities, but  I  am  quite  sure  that,  in  text  and 
notes,  he  cites  his  own  works  more  frequently 
than  those  of  any  other  celebrity,  ancient  or 
modern,  Greek  or  Latin,  or  German  or  French,' 
or  English  or  American. 

II.  Our  author  abuses  his  enemies. 

A  critic  must  never  lay  aside  his  judicial 
ermine.  He  loses  caste  and  influence  when  he 
descends  from  the  dignity  of  the  bench  to  the 
acrimony  of  the  bar.  •  We  are  amazed  that  a 
man  of  learning  and  culture,  surrounded  by  all 
refining  literary  and  religious  influences,  should 
in  our  age  and  land  of  courtesy,  so  far  forget 
himself  as  to  call  his  adversaries — "dogs": 
"evil-workers":  "  time  servers  ":  "traditiona- 
lists" "theological  Bourbons:"  "  Narrow  en- 
thusiasts," "with  obstructive  methods  and 
insincere  apologies,"  "  imposing  penalties  of 
unrighteous  and  illegal  ecclesiastical  disci- 
pline," "  blind  guides,"  "  Pharisees:"  "Philis- 
tines." 

III.  Our    author    exaggerates    his 

OFFICE. 

We  have  endeavored  to  show  the  nebulous 
region    of  probabilities    in  which  the  Higher 


THE  PARISH 


Criticism  is  forced  to  work.  Incertitude  is  its 
inseparable  characteristic.  It  is  the  Hyper- 
critic  who  mistakes  the  genius  of  his  vocation, 
"and  asserts  that  by  his  methods  he  attains 
results,  "surely  as  any  other  department  of  the 
world's  literature."  How  dangerous  to  truth 
when  we  narrow  the  field  of  proof  to  our  own  art 
or  office!  "  The  internal  evidence,"  our  author 
says,  "  must  be  decisive  in  all  questions  of 
Biblical  Criticism,"  "  which  is  the  test  of  the 
certainty  of  knowledge:  the  method  of  its 
verification." 

As  St.  Sophia  was  converted  into  a  mosque, 
and  the  Bible  on  its  walls  plastered  over  with 
the  Koran,  when  the  cross  was  supplanted  by 
the  crescent,  so  Holy  Scripture  has  been  in- 
crusted  and  dishonored  by  "  traditonalists," 
and  the  Higher  Criticism  is  to  restore  the  im- 
mortal edifice  to  its  pristine  glory.  "Scholars" 
ot  but  one  school  are  fitted  for  this  work,  and 
those,  like  the  philosophers  of  Augustus  Comte, 
are  to  constitute  a  supreme  tribunal.  We  can 
imagine  who  will  be  the  self-crowned  auriga, 
driving  his  sun-chariot  with  beams  to  wake 
over  earth  the  bloom  of  its  millenial  Eden. 

A  Hebraist  must  be  a  specialist.  He  loads 
his  memory  with  points  and  accents  and  para- 
digms, and  a  myriad  minute  things  it 
requires  a  life  to  master.  The  man  begins  with 
an  aptitude  the  reverse  of  logical,  and  his  ex- 
actitude of  scholarship  unfits  him  for  historic 
and  philosophic  research.  Inflated,  he  be- 
comes amusing,  unless  he  makes  himself  a 
blind,  baffled,  suicidal  Samson,  vainly 
embracing  the  pillars  of  eternal  truth.  In  all 
his  views  the  accomplished  Hebraist  tends  to 
the  microscopic.  He  is  awkward  with  the 
telescope,  and  unfits  himself  for  companionship 
with  the  stars.  While  he  might  piece  together 
the  pins  and  wheels  of  a  clock,  beyond  him  are 
the  laws  of  a  universe. 

Let  us  apply  a  crucial  test  to  our  author!  He 
says — "  It  may  be  regarded  as  a  certain  result 
of  Higher  Criticism  that  Moses  did  not  write 
the  Pentateuch."  Observe  !  For  this  immense 
destructive   conclusion,   no    argument  !     The 


magic  word — "  Scholarship  "—entombs  Moses, 
obliterates  Joshua,  extinguishes  Jonah,  pulver- 
izes David,  bisects  Isaiah,  muUifies  Daniel, 
discredits  Christ,  clouds  his  Apostles,  sweeps 
away  Rabbins,  overthrows  Jewish  national 
belief,  contradicts  the  Greek,  and  Latin  and 
Anglican  Communions,  and  repudiates  the 
profoundest  learning  of  English  and  American 
Protestantism.  Aliord  and  Lightfootand  West- 
cott,  with  our  Hodge  and  Greene  and  Bishop 
Williams,  fall  from  their  thrones  before  their 
hypercritic  master. 

Is  criticism  the  sole  test  of  authenticity  and 
credibility  ?  I  turn  to  Paul  !  His  authorship 
of  Hebrews  has  been  the  question  of  cen- 
turies. Amid  the  conflicting  authorities  I 
wish  to  shape  for  myself  an  opinion.  Not  on 
one  kind  of  proof,  but  all  !  I  notice  in 
Hebrews,  Graecisms  peculiar  to  Paul.  They 
are  found  in  no  other  New  Testament  writer,and 
are  not  in  the  Septuagint.  Powerful  evidence  ! 
Not  the  whole  !  Our  apostle's  name  at  the 
beginning  of  the  epistle,  att4  his  place  of 
writing  at  the  end,  have  no  claim  to  inspiration, 
but  they  show  an  early  belief  in  the  Church. 
From  text  and  tradition  I  rise  to  what,  with 
me  is  crowning  proof.  In  the  thirteen 
admitted  epistles  I  find  a  masterful  genius  for 
which  I  know  no  equal  in  any  literature.  In 
argument  our  apostle  is  king  of  men. 
Hebrews  even  surpasses  Romans.  Of  human 
reasoning  and  illustration  it  seems  to  me  the 
ideal.  No  man,  I  believe  before  Paul,  could 
write  Hebrews  or  after  Paul,  could  write 
Hebrews,  and,  fortified  by  my  other  proof,  I 
conclude,  for  myself,  that  Paul  did  write 
Hebrews. 

Or  take  Milton  !  In  his  early  political  and 
prelatical  pamphlets  what  bitterness  and 
meanness  mingle,  darkling,  in  the  fiery 
flow  of  his  eloquence  !  But  in  his  Paradise 
Lost  and  Areopagitica,  the  man  is  sublimated 
into  a  glory  of  imagery  and  argument  which 
exceeds  all  classic  poetry  and  oratory.  Do  I 
seek  him  only  in  a  critical  analysis  of  his  text  ? 
I  might  as  well  examine  the  cut  and  color  of 


THE    PARISH 


7 


his  coat.  As  I  can  discover  but  one  Paul,  so 
the  grasp  of  his  intellect  and  the  grandeur  of 
his  imagination,  prove  there  is  but  one  Milton. 

What  shall  we  say  of  Moses  ?  Above  all 
mortals  he  sits  enthroned  !  Poet,  Prophet, 
Historian,  Lawgiver!  In  his  creation  of  genius 
Almighty  God  is  less  lavish  than  hypercritics, 
and  the  first  star  He  placed  in  the  firmament 
of  Scripture  shines  indivisible  and  inextinguish- 
able in  its  supreme  and  solitary  glory.  What- 
ever the  species  and  number  of  its  traditional 
sources  the  master-intellect  of  Moses  pervades 
and  unifies  the  Pentateuch.  Now  that  Astron- 
omy and  Geology  enable  us  to  trace  worlds 
from  nebuloe  to  rotundity  and  organization, 
we  can  interpret  his  narrative  of  creation,  and 
know  that  it  is  history  and  not  poetry,  and  see 
how  inspiration  anticipates  science.  Paradise  ! 
The  Temptation  !  The  Fall !  The  Expulsion  ! 
The  Deluge  !  Inimitable  the  touches  in  these 
historic  pictures  !  They  live  in  the  memory  of 
ages  and  exceed  art  as  salvation  transcends 
literature  !  In  contrast,  how  puerile  the  idol- 
atrous Assyrian  and  Egyptian  legends  !  Moses 
alone  of  mortals  could  paint  the  sacrificial 
Story  of  Abraham  and  Isaac;  the  career  of 
Jacob  from  guile  to  glory;  Joseph  doomed  in 
Dothan,  and  exalted  in  Egypt;  the  cradle  in 
the  Nile;  the  plagues  of  Pharaoh;  the  cloud- 
guided  passage  through  the  sea;  the  miracle 
pilgrimage  in  the  wilderness. 

One  fact  stands  like  a  mountain  before  the 
nebulous  deductions  of  Hypercriticism.  For 
thousands  of  years  the  Jewish  nation  has 
received  the  Pentateuch  as  the  work  of  Moses. 
The  supreme  law  of  our  Republic  is  our 
Constitution.  We  trace  its  elements  in  Eng- 
land and  its  preparations  in  the  colonies;  we 
study  the  Revolution  which  made  it  possible, 
and  the  masterly  discussions  in  the  Convention 
by  which  it  was  adopted.  The  Federalist 
makes  us  yet  more  intimate  with  its  develop- 
ment and  genius.  Only  as  such  a  growth  of 
the  nation  could  it  become  the  law  of  the 
nation.  Let  a  hundred  years  pass  !  On  this 
day  let  that  Constitution  be  first  presented  as 


it  now  stands  !  It  would  be  an  unseemly  and 
unintelligible  anomaly.  You  might  as  well 
expect  a  corpse  to  be  received  as  an  animated 
body  after  a  century  in  its  tomb.  Whatever 
its  merits  a  Constitution,  proposed  under  such 
untimely  conditions,  would  be  repudiated  by 
our  nation,  and  hurled  back  into  the  darkness 
from  which  it  came. 

When  Hypercriticism  buries  Moses,  it  evokes 
from  its  tomb,  into  the  light  of  our  century, 
four  shadows,  nameless  and  unsubstantial  as 
ghosts.  It  gives  us  the  Judaic  Code,  the  Ephra- 
imitic  Code;  the  Deuteronomic  Code,  and  the 
Priest  Code — sounding  titles,  but  they  and  their 
authors,  unknown  to  history  or  tradition — mere 
phantoms  of  scholarly  imagination.  We  will 
confine  ourselves  to  the  accounts  of  the  taber- 
nacle and  its  ministries,  and  to  Deuteronomy, 
Included,  we  have  the  most  minute  system  of 
laws  ever  given  to  a  nation.  From  first  to  last, 
a  series  of  scores  of  Revelations,  in  words,  from 
the  lips  of  Jehovah  to  the  ears  of  Moses,  and 
sometimes  accompanied  by  visible  and  ineffable 
glory.  Jehovah  presents  a  model  of  the  taber- 
nacle with  directions  even  for  its  pins.  Jehovah 
appoints  the  priests,  their  garments,  their  resi- 
dence, their  service.  "Jehovah  spaketoMoses," 
is  the  simple  and  sublime  introduction  to  these 
numerous  personal  communications.  Never  in 
our  world's  history  have  we  recorded  so  many 
details  for  political  and  religious  government. 
At  the  close  of  the  pilgrimage  of  the  venerable 
leader  we  have  Deuteronomy.  How  does  it 
begm  !  "  These  are  the  words  which  Moses 
spake  to  all  Israel  on  this  side  of  Jordan." 
Could  there  be  a  more  distinct  avowal  of 
authorship  ?  And  it  is  implied  or  expressed  in 
every  part  of  the  record,  and  wrought  into  its 
texture.  As  Leviticus  is  a  communication 
from  Jehovah  to  Moses,  so  Deuteronomy  is  a 
communication  from  Moses  to  Israel.  The 
final  message  is  that  of  a  father  to  his  people, 
breathing  a  paternal  solicitude,  which  a  thou- 
sand years  after,  would  have  showed  in  an 
imitator  the  icy  hypocrisy  of  a  fabrication.  It 
directs  on  Ebal  an  altar  of  witness.     As  a  wit- 


THE   PARISH. 


ness  it  commands  that  the  book  be  placed  in  the 
ark  of  the  covenant.  Also  as  a  witness  is  com- 
posed and  sung  the  wonderful  song  at  the 
close.  Prophecies,  like  pictures,  paint  the  Jews 
as  we  see  them  this  moment;  and  promises 
flash  their  light  down  through  all  ages  and 
cheer  life  and  death  with  words  such  as  these — 
"  The  eternal  God  is  our  refuge  and  under- 
neath the  everlasting  arms."  Here  we  have 
not  only  history,  but  a  rational  explanation  of 
the  genius  and  future  of  Israel.  The  unbe- 
lieving fathers  fell  in  the  wilderness,  and  for 
forty  years  Moses  educated  their  sons  into  his 
system.  After  the  conquest,  was  erected  at 
Shiloh  the  tabernacle,  succeeded  by  the  tem- 
ple at  Jerusalem.  But  the  nation,  following  the 
seduced  Solomon,  with  their  kings,  rushed  into 
idolatry.  Bel  supplanted  Jehovah,  the  law 
was  forgotten,  the  temple  defiled.  Hezekiah 
and  Josiah  were  royal  reformers  and  restorers. 
After  the  captivity,  Ezra  established  the  wor- 
ship of  the  New  Temple,  and  Moses  came 
down  to  Christ  as  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch 
and  the  lawgiver  of  Israel. 

Before  we  test  the  opposite,  hypercritic  view, 
we  must  pause  to  notice  a  contradiction  in 
our  author.  He  says  that  the  laws  and 
institutions  of  the  Jews,  civil,  religious  and 
domestic,  were  not  given  in  the  wilderness,  but 
are  "  now  seen  to  be  the  development  of  the 
experience  of  Israel  during  the  centuries  of  his 
residence  in  the  Holy  Land.  No  one  would 
think  of  ascribing  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States,  and  all  the  elaborate  system  of 
common  and  statute  law  in  Great  Britian  and 
America  to  the  Anglo  Saxon  tribes  who 
invaded  England,  and  established  the  basis  of 
the  Anglo  Saxon  civilization.  It  would  be  no 
more  absurd  than  to  ascribe  the  elaborate  Penta- 
teuchal  codes  to  Israel  of  the  Exodus."  Here 
Hypercriticism  sweeps  from  the  Bible  every 
revelation  from  Mount  Sinai  to  Mount  Pisgah. 
It  gives  the  lie  to  each  instance  where  it  is 
said,  "  Jehovah  spake  to  Moses."  It  obliterates 
God  from  his  word,  which  it  brands  with  false- 
hood.    It   makes    the    Law    of  Israel,  not  as 


described  in  the  Pentateuch,  a  divine  commu- 
nication in  the  wilderness,  but  a  natural 
evolution  in  Canaan,  just  as  our  constitution 
was  a  human  development.  Neither  Straus 
nor  Renan,  nor  IngersoU  could  do,  or  say,  or 
ask  more,  and  the  subsequent  admission  of 
the  theophanies  only  exposes  the  painful  con- 
tradictions of  a  learned,  but  illogical  writer. 

You  will  not  be  surprised  if  I  now  proceed 
to  show  that  Hypercriticism  tends  to  infidelity. 
As  we  have  seen,  it  creates,  instead  of  Moses, 
four  authors  for  the  Pentateuch.  We  will  con- 
sider only  two  of  its  codes,  and  for  our  conven- 
ience, call  them  Leviticus  and  Deuteronomy. 
These  Hypercriticism  ascribes  to  periods 
just  before  and  after  the  Babylonish  Captivity. 
In  answer  to  this  view  I  will  draw  an  illustra- 
tion from  Greece  and  America. 

What  gives  us  our  confidence  in  Thucydi- 
des  ?  He  was  a  man  of  broad  intellect,  large 
culture  and  stainless  integrity.  Anticipating 
the  Peloponnesian  war,  before  burst  forth  the 
fatal  flames,  he  began  to  collect  his  materials. 
During  the  battles  and  intrigues  of  thirty  years 
between  the  states  of  Greece  he  was  a  keen 
and  faithful  observer.  Hence,  when  published, 
his  history  was  received  by  his  country  as  a! 
supreme  authority;  and  Thucydides  will  for- 
ever occupy  the  throne  assigned  him  by  his 
contemporaries.  His  History  was  made  at  the 
time  by  an  author  all  ages  trust.  But  let  a 
thousand  years  pass  !  Now  introduce  Thu- 
cydides !  All  is  reversed  !  No  human  mind 
could  retain  and  recall  such  innumerable  de- 
tails. Every  argument  for  credibility  becomes 
an  argument  for  imposture. 

Our  Nicolai  and  Hay  were  intimates  of 
President  Lincoln.  The  man  and  the  ruler 
were  familiar  to  these  writers.  Before  their 
eyes  passed  the  events  of  the  Civil  War.  What 
they  saw  and  knew  they  give  our  nation,  which 
receives  their  biography  as  a  standard  author- 
ity. Again,  suppose  a  thousand  years  to  pass  ! 
In  this  far  future  let  the  great  work  first 
appear  !  What  a  monstrous  incongruity  and 
impossibility  !      No    memory    could    transmit 


THE   PARISH. 


such  a  vast  mass  of  minute  facts.  All  once  in 
favor  of  the  book  would  now  be  against  it. 
Never  could  it  obtain  circulation.  An  indig- 
nant republic  would  repudiate  the  work  as  a 
fraud. 

The  principles  we  apply  to  Grecian  History, 
and  to  American  History,  let  us  now  apply  to 
Mosaic  History. 

After  the  wanderings  of  the  wilderness  a 
thousand  years  pass.  To  the  Jews  Moses  as  a 
writer  is  unknown.  Josiah  is  on  the  throne  of 
Israel.  A  manuscript  is  brought  to  the  King. 
It  is  Deuteronomy  !  The  monarch  examines 
the  new  parchment-roll  !  Promises  !  Proph- 
ecies !  A  review  of  the  wildernsss  !  The 
Law  rehearsed  !  Predictions  embracing  the 
twelve  tribes  !  An  altar  commanded  at  Ebal  ! 
The  book  to  be  deposited  in  the  ark  !  Cursings 
and  blessings  on  the  mountains  !  Jehovah's 
care  recalled  in  the  small  matter  of  a  camp- 
paddle  !  A  song  palpitating  with  the  heart  of 
a  father  !  Warnings  and  encouragements  as 
from  Moses  solemnized  by  death  and  eternity  ! 
After  ten  centuries  no  mortal  memory  could 
retain  these  details.  Those  very  minutioe 
which  a  thousand  years  before  would  have 
gained  confidence,  are  now  so  many  sure 
marks  of  imposture.  Josiah  would  be  forced  to 
condemn  such  a  Deuteronomy  as  a  forgery. 
Yet  Hypercriticism  would  persuade  us  that 
this  forgery  converted  the  monarch,  reformed 
the  temple,  revolutionized  the  kingdom,  This 
forgery  draws  to  itself  the  name  of  Moses  as 
its  writer,  and  is  believed,  and  accepted  and 
venerated  by  the  nation.  This  forgery  is 
quoted  three  times  by  our  Lord  as  Scripture 
in  his  Temptation.  With  heaven  open,  and 
its  glory  on  his  face,  Stephen,  from  this  for- 
gery, applies  a  prophecy  to  Christ.  Twice  in 
Romans  Paul  uses  this  forgery  as  an  argument. 
All  Jews  receive  this  foi^gery  as  the  work  of 
Moses,  and  as  such  it  is  incorporated  into  the 
canon  of  Chistendom. 

Stronger  than  Deuteronomy  the  case  ol 
Leviticus  !  Add  the  parts  of  Exodus  and 
Numbers  pertaining  to  the  tabernacle  !     The 


plan  of  this  sacred  structure  was  communi- 
cated by  J'.hovah  to  Moses  on  the  mountain. 
Nothing  could  be  more  specific.  Pins  are 
mentioned.  We  have  poles,  bars,  boards, 
curtains,  vestments,  incense,  altars,  lamps,  oil, 
bread,  mercy-seat,  feasts  and  fasts,  and 
offerings,  and  cities  of  refuge  and  of  habita- 
tion— the  most  elaborate  priesthood  and 
ceremonial  everappoiiited.  Details  innumera- 
able  !  Beyond  the  retentive  power  of  mortals  ! 
To  tradition  impossible  !  Everywhere  words 
expressing  revelation  !  "  And  Jeliovah  spake 
to  Moses."  Presented  at  the  time  of  the  events, 
details  would  be  a  recommendation,  and 
promote  credence,  while,  a  thousand  years 
after,  they  would  be  a  barrier,  as  beyond 
memory,  and  compel  rejection.  Hypercritic 
Leviticus  Ezra  would  pronounce  forgery.  Yet 
we  are  to  be  persuaded  that  this  forgery 
became  the  law  of  the  new  temple,  and  for 
ages  shaped  the  belief  and  worship  of  the 
Jews.  This  forgery  supplied  that  typica} 
tabernacle  which,  under  the  Gospel,  illustrated 
the  sacrificial  system  of  Christ,  and  in  the 
Apocalypse  was  made  the  celestial  centre  of 
the  everlasting  glory. 

Hypercriticism  thus  forces  us  to  conclude 
that  its  Leviticus  is  a  forgery;  its  Deute- 
ronomy a  forgery;  and  with  the  greatest 
part  of  its  Exodus  and  Numbers  also  a  for- 
gery, to  the  small  residuum  will  attach  for- 
gery, and  the  taint  of  the  fraud  will  extend 
to  Genesis:  and  its  Pentateuch  be  a  discred- 
ited falsehood.  Moses  a  forgery  !  Yet  Jesus 
Christ  fulfilled  this  forgery,  quoted  this  forgery, 
imposed  this  forgery  as  a  condition  of  faith  in 
Himself  !  Speaking  of  Moses  he  said,  "  But  if 
ye  believe  not  his  writings  how  can  ye  believe 
my  words  ?"  Believe  a  forgery  !  To  me  such 
a  Moses  is  an  imaginary  literary  patch  work 
more  incredible  than  the  Koran.  You  miglu 
as  well  place  Mohammed  between  Christ  and 
my  faith  as  this  Hypercritic  Moses.  But  of 
him  whose  Holy  Law  convinces  my  reason 
and  convicts  my  conscience  and  prepares  me 
for  the   salvation   of  the   Gospel,    I  hear  the 


lO 


THE   PARISH. 


Master  say — "My  Moses,  I,  the  Jehovah, 
watched  in  his  cradle,  commanded  from  the 
bush,  empowered  in  Egypt.  My  Moses  I  led 
through  the  sea,  met  on  the  mountain,  guided 
through  the  wilderness.  My  Moses  I  inspired 
as  a  Prophet,  and  taught  as  my  Lawgiver,  and 
summoned  to  my  Transfiguration,  and  joined 
his  name  in  that  song  to  the  Lamb  which  is 
the  sublimest  worship  of  my  universe." 

Now  let  us  turn  from  the  Law  to  the  Gospel ! 
With  sorrow  I  make  a  last  arraignment  of 
Hypercriticism  ! 

Our  Bibles  are  full  of  errors.  These  we 
ascribe  to  copyists  and  translators;  and  it  is 
the  grand  work  of  critical  science  to  correct 
mortal  mistakes  and  restore  the  text  to  its 
original  purity.  In  this  holy  enterprise  we 
have  to  consider  Scripture  as  a  Revelation  and 
an  Inspiration,  whose  record  has  not  been 
placed  beyond  our  human  infirmities.  Reve- 
lation is  substance  and  Inspiration  is  form. 
Revelation  communicates  the  truth  which 
Inspiration  expresses.  When  Jehovah  showed 
Moses  the  model  tabernacle  He  could  have  left 
its  description  to  the  words  of  his  servant.  But 
Paul  says,  ndda  y pacpij  fJE^nvEvdroi  all  Script- 
ure God-breathed,  and  therefore  an  Inspira- 
tion as  well  as  a  Revelation.  Each  writer  re- 
tains his  individuality,  and  we  limit  the  Holy 
Ghost  by  no  definitions.  For  ourselves  we 
cannot  believe  that  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  same 
man,  at  the  same  time,  in  the  same  act,  teaches 
truth  and  permits  error.  To  admit  this,  for  us, 
would  make  faith  in  the  Holy  Ghost  impossible, 
and  therefore  veil  the  Scripture  in  eternal 
darkness.  Hypercriticism  thinks  otherwise. 
Boldly  it  traces  the  errors  of  our  Bibles,  not 
only  to  the  inability  of  man,  but  the  impotency 
of  God.  "Canst  thou  bind  the  Pleiades?"  Yet 
Hyperiticism  limits  our  Lord,  the  omnipotent 
creator  of  stars,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  proceed- 
ing from  the  Father  of  the  Universe,  and  thus 
the  Everlasting  Trinity.  Hear  the  proof  in 
the  words  of  our  author!  "The  only  answer 
is  that  Jesus  could  not  give  his  teachings  in 
inerrant  forms;  the  Holy  Spirit  could  not 
communicate  the  inerrant  word  to  man." 


We  have  not  yet  seen  the  full  flower  in  the 
crown  of  the  glory  of  Hypercriticism.  This 
our  author  unfolds  in  a  quotation  to  prove  the 
importance  of  his  science.  Now  we  can  test 
him,  not  in  the  haze  of  misty  manuscripts,  and 
corrupted  texts,  and  nebulous  regions,  where 
scholars  reign,  but  in  an  exegesis  determinable 
by  plain  common  sense.  I  will  give  the  words 
our  author  cites  and  approves. — "  It  was 
apparently  this  gift  of  tongues  with  which  the 
disciples  were  endowed  at  Pentecost,  and  they 
spoke,  therefore,  not  in  foreign  languages,  but 
in  the  ecstatic,  frenzied,  unintelligible,  spirit- 
ual speech  of  which  Paul  tells  us  in  his  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians." 

In  glowing  words  the  Old  Testament  pre- 
dicts the  Holy  Ghost.  Baptism  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  the  grand  characteristic  of  the  Gospel. 
For  the  Holy  Ghost  our  Lord  commanded  his 
disciples  to  tarry  in  Jerusalem.  Their  assem- 
blage was  glorious  as  the  sublime  occasion  of 
the  true  birth  of  the  Christian  Church.  On  their 
heads  fall  and  flame  tongues  of  fire.  They, 
speak,  how?  "  As  the  Spirit  gave  them  utter- 
ance." They  speak,  our  author  asserts,  "not 
in  foreign  languages,"  whereas  the  Scripture 
says,  "  How  hear  we  every  man  in  our  own 
tongue  wherein  we  were  born  ?  "  They  speak, 
what?  Toi  i^isyaXeia  rov  Osov  The  wonders 
of  God.  What  "  wonders  ! "  "  Wonders  "  given 
in  Peter's  Pentecostal  Sermon  — Christ  Pro- 
phecied;  Christ  Crucified:  Christ  Glorified. 
Hearing  these  "  wonders,"  the  Proselytes  were 
first  amazed  and  then  converted.  Yet  Hyper- 
criticism makes  the  apostolic  witnesses  of  our 
Lord  unintelligible  babblers  !  For  testimony, 
frenzy !  Instead  of  inspired  speech,  pitiable 
jargon  !  A  New  Testament  Babel !  Such  is 
the  crown  of  festivals  in  the  calendar  of  the 
Universal  Church  !  No  !  Hypercriticism  libels 
Pentecost,  and  caricatures  the  Holy  Ghost  ! 

We  must  not  forget,  that  in  Europe  and 
America,  men,  ambitious  to  pulverise  the 
everlasting  rock  of  the  Divine  Word,  have  filled 
the  air  with  the  dust  of  their  own  doubts. 
Paralysis  threatens  the  old  manly  faith  of 
prophets,  apostles   and  martyrs.     Hypercriti- 


THE   PARISH. 


II 


cism  mistakes  form  for  substance,  and  makes 
the  first  last,  and  the  last  first.  It  loves  to 
style  the  Bible  a  Literature;  Does  it  call  Science 
a  Literature  ?  No  !  Why  ?  Literature  appeals 
to  esthetical  taste  proverbially  fickle,  while 
Science  appeals  to  reason  seeking  by  proof  the 
fixed  eternal  laws  of  the  universe.  Literature 
is  to  Science  an  incident.  If  Literature  is  not 
the  essential  of  Science  still  less  is  it  the  es- 
sential of  Scripture.  My  Bible  presents  itself, 
not  as  a  Literature  but  as  a  Revelation, 
attested  by  prophecy  and  by  miracle.  To  the 
Jew  it  was  a  statute  from  his  sovereign  Jehovah, 
Creator  of  the  universe,  guarded  by  temporal 
rewards  and  penalties;  and  to  the  Christian,  it 
is  a  Redemption  by  Jesus,  the  Incarnate  God, 
predestined  in  eternity,  with  everlasting  sanc- 
tions. 

Amid  these  assaults  from  within  and  with- 
out, why  is  Scripture  a  certitude}  My  reason 
must  be  satisfied.  Our  quickened,  universal 
popular  intelligence  craves  truth.  For  bread 
shall  I  offer  a  stone  to  appease  an  immortal 
hunger?  Never!  My  Bible  invites  and  dares 
criticism.  Only  these  lightning-flashes  of 
controversy  can  clear  our  spiritual  atmosphere. 
Arius  made  an  Athanasius  and  Pelagius  an 
Augustine.  Shall  my  faith  depend  on  the 
cameleon  theories  of  scholars  ?  Before  I  be- 
lieve must  I  wait  the  turn  of  the  spade  of  the 
archaeologist,  the  discoveries  of  the  hammer  of 
the  geologist,  the  analysis  of  the  nebuloeofthe 
astronomer  ?  Must  my  salvation  be  postponed 
to  an  indefinite  future?  Then  am  I  left  change- 
ful as  a  cloud  and  restless  as  the  ocean. 

Amid  multiplied  Biblical  errors  insinuated 
by  mortal  infirmity  I  have  a  comfort.  Diffier- 
ences  relate  to  minute  matters  noticeable  only 
by  scholars,  and  do  not  affect  one  fact  or  truth 
of  our  salvation.  In  whatever  language  I  read 
Scripture  it  is  the  same  true  and  trustful  guide 
to  the  Life  Eternal.  It  begins  with  announcing 
Almighty  God  as  the  creator  of  his  universe. 
The  majesty  of  the  Everlasting  Sovereign 
stoops  not  to  philosophic  or  metaphysic 
argument.  My  Bible  is  a  statute  of  salvation  pro- 


posed on  condition  of  my  repentance,  faith  and 
obedience,  with  eternal  rewards  and  penalties. 
But,  with  proofs  to  my  Reason!  To  my  Reason 
it  makes  one  simple  and  supreme  appeal!  And 
as  the  proofs  of  Science  are  plain  which  end  in 
laws,  so  are  the  proofs  of  Revelation  plain 
which  end  in  mysteries.  All  the  proofs  of  my 
Bible  centre  in  the  Resurrection  of  my  Lord. 
After  death  did  He  exhibit  voluntary  motion? 
Did  He  see  ?  Did  He  hear  ?  Did  He  talk  ? 
Did  He  walk  ?  Facts  these  for  the  eye  and  ear 
and  finger!  Through  the  visible,  the  audible, 
the  tangible,  this  appeal  to  Reason  !  I  ex- 
amine in  the  Gospels  the  apostolic  witnesses. 
In  them  meet  all  legal  tests  of  truth.  Behind 
them  in  One  who  compels  my  faith.  He,  in 
earth's  history,  the  alone  perfect  man — He  a 
model  for  angels — He  the  moral  ideal  of  a 
universe — He,  to  imposture  impossible  as  the 
creation  of  his  worlds — He,  in  regard  to  whom 
the  thought  of  lie  is  blasphemy — He  testifies 
to  his  own  Resurrection.  My  reason  believes 
this  infallible  witness.  Then,  as  He  claimed, 
He  is  Messiah  with  Godhead.  The  seal  of  his 
Godhead  He  placed  on  the  Old  Testament 
and  pledged  his  Godhead  for  the  New.  Gospels  ! 
Acts  !  Epistles  !  Each  and  all  I  can  show 
written  by  apostles,  or  under  sanction  of 
apostles.  These  apostles  Christ  promised  his 
Spirit  to  testily  of  Himself.  Thus  behind  the 
whole  Bible  is  the  Godhead  of  my  Savior. 
When  I  examine  the  books  in  detail,  all  I  find 
within  corresponds  to  all  I  find  without. 
Evidences  and  Contents  alike  satisfy  my  reason. 
I  start  from  the  senses  in  proof  of  the  Resur- 
rection. I  ascend  to  Messiahship.  I  end  in  God- 
head. Have  I  separated  myself  from  the  faith 
and  tradition,  and  learning  and  wisdom  of  the 
past  ?  No  !  Here  is  our  English  Bible  !  It  is 
accepted  by  Christendom.  Greeks  and  Latins 
are  divided  from  Anglicans  and  Protestants  in 
regard  to  the  au  hority  of  the  apocrypha. 
About  a  thousand  other  things  they  disagree. 
But  all  the  books  of  my  English  Bible  are 
received  as  Revelations  from  God  by  all  the 
communions  of  all  the  world.  This  silent  and 
spontaneous  concurrence  is  more  powerful 
and  satisfactory  than  any  formal  decree  of  a 
General  Council.  It  is  the  voiceless  sovereign- 
ty of  the  Church  Universal,  and  a  prophetic 
sign  of  the  future  unity  of  a  divided  Christen- 
dom. With  such  proofs  to  reason,  enlight- 
ened by  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Scripture  becomes 
a  triumphant  Cekth  ude. 


12 


THE   PARISH. 


S,  3obiV0  Cburcb, 

S.  John's  ^lace^below  Seventh  ji.venue. 


SERVICES. 


A.  M.,   and  on 
month,  at   the 


Thk  Holy  Communion.— At 

the   tirst    Sunday  in   each 

Morning  Service. 
MoKNiNG  Service  at  10:30. 
Evening  Service   at  7:45. 
Sunday-School  at  3  P.  M. 
Celebkatiox  every  Saints'  Day,  7:30  A.M. 
Friday  Es^euing  Service,  5  P.M. 


Holy  Baptism.— This  Sacrament  -will  be  ad- 
ministered, after  due  notice,  at  any  Service  of 
Moruing  or  Evening  Prayer,  and  especially  at 
the  Children's  Service,  second  Sunday  in  each 
month,  except  on  Sunday  moruing.  It  will 
always  be  administered  in  Church,  except  in  case 
of  sickness. 

Other  Offices. — The  Rector  is  always  ready 
to  perform  any  spiritual  office,  whenever  desired; 
to  visit  any  person  who  is  ill ;  to  administer  the 
Holy  Communion  to  the  sick  and  to  bury  the 
dead.  All  funerals  should  be  in  the  Clinrcll,  and 
never  on  Sunday,  except  when  absolutely  neces- 
sary. The  Rector  should  always  be  consulted 
before  the  time  is  appointed. 

CORPORATION  AND  PAROCHIAL 
ORGANIZATIONS. 

Hector. 

The  Reverend  George  F.   Breed, 

No.  139  S.  John's  Place. 


Wardetts. 
Edward  I.  Horsman, 
J.  Eliott  Langstaff, 


Vestrymen. 
George  W.  Gilbert, 
Melvin  J.  Bailey, 
Sherman  Esselstyn,  Treasurer, 

No.  486  Second  Street. 
Gonzola  Poey, 

John  G.   Luke, 
Thomas  McIlvaine, 
Henry  S.  Northrop, 
Charles  R.   Kearns 
John  Lund. 


Choir  Master  and  Organist. 

Frank  Wright, 

564  Carlton  Avenue. 


Sexton. 

E.  M.  Stephenson, 

48  Garfield  Place. 


Vestry  Committees, 
On  Finance  and  Building— Messrs.  Esselstyn, 
Gilbert,  Kearns  and  Northrop. 

Music — Messrs.  Lyles,  Luke  and  Lund. 
On  Pews — Messrs.  Horsman,  Langstaff,  Bailey 
and  McIlvaine. 


S.  JOHN'S  GUILD. 

Warden  -The  Rector. 
Meets  the  first  Monday  in  each  month,  from 
October  to  June,  at  8  P.M. 

ChaptePyS  of  the  Guild. 

The  Missionary  Chapter. 

Head  of  Chapter — '^ 
Meets  Tuesdays  at  2  P.M. 

The  Altar  Chapter. 
Head  of  Chapter -Mrs.  M.  R.  Kintzing.  - 
Meets  the  Tuesday  preceeding  the  first  Sunday 
iu  each  mouth  at  4  P.  M. 

The  Sunday  School  Chapter, 
Head  of  Chapter — W.  A.  Alkinson. 
Meets  every  Sunday  at  3  P.M. 

The  Choi?  Chapter. 
Head  of  Chapter — Frank  Wright. 

Liirarian  of  Church  Periodical  Club. 
Mrs.  G.  W.  Gilbert,  149  Sixth  Avenue. 


FOBM  OF  BEQUEST. 
I  hereby  give  and  bequeath  to  the  Sector,  Church 
Wardens  and  Vestrymen  of  Saint  John's  Church,  a1 
Brooklyn,  situate  on  S.  Jolm^s  Place,  near  Seventh 

Avenue,  the  sum  of Dollars,  to  be  used 

and  applied  for  the  payment  of  its  mortgage  debt 
or  as  an  endowment. 


DATE  DUE 


"^^mr^^mss,^ 

HIGHSMITH        #  45220 


